Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86: fix text_poke

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge]

Ingo Molnar wrote:
> And once we accept the static 
> markers, we might as well make them as cheap as possible.

Sure, so long as you take "as cheap as possible" to mean cheap in both 
implementation complexity as well as runtime cost.

I don't have any specific objections to any of the stuff that Mathieu is 
working on, but it does worry me that each time a problem is addressed 
it ends up being an even more subtle piece of code.  I just haven't seen 
enough concrete justification to make me feel comfortable with it all.

It seems to me that a relatively simple implementation which allows the 
desired tracing/marking functionality is the first step.  If that proves 
to cause a significant performance deficit then enabled then we can work 
out how to address it in due course.  But doing it all at once before 
merging anything seems like overkill, particularly when we're talking 
about specifics of gcc's codegen patterns, disassembling code fragments, 
etc.

   J
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/